Conference yukon::christian_v7

    Some other thoughts...
    
    Arguing fine points of doctrine before non-believers is really
    unnecessary and unbecoming.  It makes the L-rd appear divided when in
    reality, it's our foolish choice to yield to the temptations of pride
    and division.  It may border on the spirit of the injuction given in
    2Corinthians about taking (legal) disputes before non-believers.  "Why
    not rather be wronged", says Sha'ul.
    
    If you disagree with something a brother or sister says, speak (write)
    with them privately and straighten it out between yourselves.  It isn't
    necessary to debate doctrine before unbelievers.
    
    Also, there are some perhaps well meaning, but definitely foolish
    things said from time to time (we all make mistakes, but I'm talking
    about consistent patterns) that make believers appear to have no brain
    function.  Such types of talk have even been referred to as
    "boiler-plate sermons".  What an absolute shame!
    
    Believers who know better need not argue with those who will not
    listen.
    
    Again - just some thoughts.
    
    
    Steve

 I feel the Lord has been telling me for sometime to stay out of there,
 and for the umpteenth time I deleted the conference today, and hopefully
 that will be the last time.



 God and the Gospel have been discussed and argued exhaustively for months.
 I've seen God mocked and laughed at and criticized and finally I decided it
 was time to "shake the dust off of my feet" and get out of there.


 


Jim

	Good stuff, Steve.

	I've been reading through the conference periodically (which
	is harder than it may sound, given the unbelievable amount of
	garbage notes that go in there), and have, at times, been saddened 
	to read some of the responses entered by fellow brothers and sisters.

	I struggled to reply last week when a topic about Christians was
	started.  Perhaps the topic was just bait, but I found it quite
	offensive.  I also realized that any reply entered there could be
	ripped to shred by those desiring to tear down Christianity.

	I agree that we need to consider our words carefully when noting
	in non-Christian conferences.  Too often, a brother comes across as
	though he speaks for all Christians, and I feel like jumping up
	and screaming, "Hey, that's not what *I* believe, speak for yourself!"
	(especially those that point to doctrine and practices as though
	they were the essence of Christianity).

	thanks for the food for thought,
	Karen

Along another thought that we've been talking about in other notes in 
this conference, one must weigh their participation in challenging environs
such that "how much am I influencing someone for Christ?" (salt) and
"how much are the godless influencing me?"  As you know, I do not advocate
being separate from the godless, but we must be careful to not be corrupted
by them either.  We are called to be in the world, but not of it, and it
is especially important to keep your witness clean.

Mark

    I get more offended by how some of the Christians in Soapbox are
    throwing the Gospel in there faces, than I am about the way they bash
    christians or God. Its certainly not not in Love, It does not give
    grace and is not advancing the Kingdom of God. As far as that goes it
    building bigger walls between Christians and others.
    
    Steve,
    I like what you had to say about being salt.
    
    Orval

    
    I've learned long ago, that if you go into Soapbox you must do so with 
    a sense of humor. I've met some of the noters this past Saturday
    evening, and their notes don't reflect the nice people they really are.

    Most of the noting in Soapbox is "tongue-in-cheek" with heavy leg
    pulling. 

    Jim

    Steve,
    
    You've made some excellent points. One thing that really gets me is
    when people note in conferences identifying themselves as Christians
    and putting forth views as Christians...then their actions within that
    conference are point blank embarrassing. They don't show forth the love and
    grace of God, their personal witness (as in actions, fruits of the
    spirit) are missing such that any words they or other Christians would
    say. It seems to me that many people have forgotten that old phrase
    "Action Speaks Louder Than Words."
    
    Not only do I hear from my Christian friends and non-Christian friends
    of the damage these people do to the kingdom, I've found it negatively
    affecting me and my ability to witness and be vocal about my faith.
    Seems to me we should be clearing the snow off the pathway for each
    other not piling the snow higher to make it tougher for the next guy
    who comes along.
    
    nw 

    Thanks for your responses, all...please keep them coming.
    
    Just so I'm sure I'm clear here - I'm not faulting non-believers in
    SOAPBOX.  I think Jim mentioned "shaking the dust from [his] feet" and
    I understand that sentiment, but to me, it's not as though I've seen a
    rejection of the Gospel (to the extent It has been properly shared) so
    much as a rejection of what has been called "boiler-plate preaching"
    which is a scathing commentary by a non-believer if we choose to
    listen.
    
    Maybe another analogy would help...
    
    You know that old joke about Americans in France - how they go into a
    restaurant and ask the waiter something in English and the waiter
    obviously doesn't understand, so the American speaks louder and slower,
    saying the same English words over and over again to a French person
    who doesn't understand a word he's saying.
    
    I guess that's the point.  I actually agree with the person who
    referred to it as boiler-plate preaching.  Someone doesn't understand? 
    No problem - I'll just speak S L O W E R    AND   LOUDER!
    
    But we're not speaking the same language.
    
    Ever see that Larson cartoon the Far Side?  The one where he has two
    panels, one that says "What we say" - and it's a guy telling his dog
    Ginger to..."Be a good girl, Ginger, I don't want you getting into
    trouble, Ginger.", etc.  and the other panel says, "What they hear" -
    and it shows Ginger hearing, "blah blah blah Ginger blah blah blah
    Ginger".  That's not meant as a slam to non-believers (they're not
    dogs! ;-), but it's meant to illustrate the point.
    
    I think we need less "blah blah blah Jesus" in our words and a whole
    lot more compassionate understanding of the lost and actions springing
    from the faith and hope we have in our lives.
    
    What passes for (and is acceptable) standard fare in CHRISTIAN is likely
    not going to be received in SOAPBOX or in your community or with
    non-believing members of your family, etc.  When among believers, how
    precious and blessed it is for us to be able to share about the L-rd
    and rejoice together with and in Him!  When among non-believers, our
    lives should be our witness, not [necessarily or exclusively] our
    words.  "You show me this faith of yours.  I'll show you my faith *by
    what I do*" says James.
    
    More ramblings.  Please keep the thoughts coming, I'm very much
    interested in how others think about this.
    
    Steve

re:8
    
>    Just so I'm sure I'm clear here - I'm not faulting non-believers in
>    SOAPBOX.  I think Jim mentioned "shaking the dust from [his] feet" and

     Nope, I didn't say it. No this time anyway.


    Jim

More to the point, Steve, is how do Christians deal with others who hinder
the witness?  

You hear me harp about definition and communication, which conveys the
thought instead of the word.  Even among Christians, it takes many words
for Baptist and Nazarene to discover that we're not too far apart because
we use the same English words with different definitions.

The godless each have a definition of Christian in their mind.  One 
professed Christian is all Christians.  We must show less and less 
what it means to be a Christian and more and more what it means to
be Christ-like.  Now, I've played with words here, and I mean that 
there is little meaning and definition left to the word Christian, 
but we can still point to Jesus Christ as the Prototypical Christian,
to whom we measure ourselves and all Christianity.

There needs to be Christians among the godless, or they shall remain forever
godless, and this even in the face of professing Christians who confuse the
definition of Christlikeness among the godless.

Mark

P.S.

It bugs me when some people say "Jesus wouldn't do such and such" when
they show a marked lack of scholarship about Jesus Himself.  Ever wonder
why we need the Bible?  It gives definition to Christianity.

.9 Jim

Different Jim, Jim.

    Ooops !

    Too many Jim's ;)

    Jim (the other one.)

 .9  


 Yeah, Jim, it was this Jim




 Jim



 :-)

.8 - Agreed, Steve.  When a Christian has hit someone on the head to show
where their bump should be smooth, it means you can't work round the way to
tell them gently so they can accept it - in fact, it means that they'll be
very sensitive about anyone mentioning the shape of heads for a long
while...  You have to talk about something else altogether until they're
abre to relax with Christians around. 

							Andrew

    -1
    
    I just noticed all my typose :-) logging in from home... 
    
    sheesh
    Nancy

    
    I read both conferences and participate in soapbox, while just trying
    to learn in the Christian notesfile.  In the box I tell them that there
    is no proof needed to believe in got, but rather it is a matter of
    faith which cannot be explained.  
    
    Peace,
    
    Mike
    
    P.S. I also find it better if one describes things in the first person. 
    Tell other folks how it was for you.
          
    
    

    Our Daily Bread Promise Box afforded me this scripture:
    
    When a man's ways please the Lord, he maketh even his enemies to be at
    peace with him.  Proverbs 16:7
    
    

    I've been reading a wonderful book entitled "Inside the Mind of
    Unchurched Harry and Mary" by Lee Stroebel.  I HIGHLY recommend reading
    this (can find at your local Christian bookstore in paperback for under
    $10.00).  If I can find my copy of the book, I'll enter in some brief
    points from Lee.  (I'm in the midst of packing, both here and at home,
    so bear with me.)
    
    Lee Stroebel in his "B.C." days was a jounalist with the Chicago
    Tribune.  He was brash and abrasive, yet genuinely hungry for truth. 
    His search led him to Jesus and now he's a part of the Willow Creek
    Church.  You won't regret hearing his personal testimony.
    
    There's some wonderful pointers in reaching the unchurched (and those
    outside of Christ, even if they are "church goers").  Check it out! 
    Especially if you're participating in a highly visible conference like
    the 'Box.
    
    In Him,
    
    -greta 

Re. all of the previous.

1)  Nancy, I am glad to see that you can handle noting in soapbox.  We all
have gifts, and it seems to me that you would represent us well in such a
forum.  

2)  Some of us will always function badly in such an environment due to any
number of factors.  An important one is the difficulty of actually addressing
the true differences or reasons for holding one viewpoint or other.  The
basis is so overwhelmingly different for humanists and Christians that to
discuss other issues without resolving the differences is a taxing job.

3)  If one is going to participate in soapbox or an such forum, may I suggest
that you first review the account of Elijah's experiences (this is best of
memory, corrections welcomed).  The results of his demonstrations with the
burning are most helpful.  Either this will help you to avoid frustration or
send you off to the wilderness after your soapbox encounters.

4)  If you observe someone being less than salt in soapbox or any other
arena, how about passing it on to them offline?  Let me be more specific.
If you observe me doing that, please just poke me with mail or something
to remind me that after I present what I consider to be an exceptionally
lucid explanation, my wife frequently gets a look that clearly expresses,
"What planet did you say you were from?"

Lew

Hi Lew,

Point 4 may be good in principle, but very delicate in practise... Make
sure you know someone well enough to communicate love and empathy rather
than judgement, if you're going to say 'hey, as a brother in the LORD, that
note wasn't quite kosher', otherwise it's easy to drive them into a
defensive position, instead of eassing them out of a situation... 

btw - "What planet did you say you were from?"

I guess it's probably the same one as me...
	like in Hebrews 11:13b-16 13:14, 1 Peter 2:11 ...
						;-)

							Andrew

    Lew,
    
    I exited Soapbox this week.  The reasons being that my testimony is
    important to me and the influence of the "box" will eventually come
    down, as my dear friend Mark has pointed out.  
    
    Nancy

Hi &rew and Nancy,

I just got back in to clarify that the scripture I wanted to point to
in topic 3 in .20 is in 1 Kings 18 and 19.  It is very much something
to keep in mind.

Andrew, you were the other person I had in mind who _could_ probably
handle the box that needs soap, so I'm doubly glad to see you interested.
Even so, I'm fully in support of your revised position, Nancy.  Still
goes that, if anyone has to be there, you'd be a good choice to represent
us.  I never could even read it much.  It's just makes me so sad, but I
know they won't accept my help.

I guess the real point of 4 is to correct me at any time, as I have
learned the hard way that things I say get taken differently from how
I meant them.

What a pleasure to log in tonight and get responses from you 2!

Lew

    I think a lot of the folks participating in SOAPBOX tend to play
    'devil's advocate' a lot.  Some will see how far they can wind others
    up in an argument...even if they don't actually take a side.
    
    I've been wound up once or twice, but have since decided to enter
    'lighter' notes laced with humor.  If something offends me, I don't
    take it personally.  Some of the views stated there were pretty close
    to mine before I became a Christian.  Most comments are either out of
    ignorance or are intended to 'rile the thumpers'.  I suggest that those
    who participate in the BOX do so with this in mind.
    
    I don't expect my words to do any more than give the HOly Spirit a way
    in to the reader's heart (if they read it, then it's in their thoughts-
    whether they belive it or not).  If I can be but that first 'stepping
    stone' to someone's salvation, then I will be a happy camper.  
    
    How many of us didn't go through several stepping stones before truly
    accepting Christ?  Toss the seed out and see what happens!
    
    -steve (who's not yet polluted by the BOX)

    Couple more thoughts (btw, thanks for what's here so
    far...innerusting!)
    
    About contacting people off-line...I do that when I feel it's
    appropriate.  I hate when I do or say something stoopid and everyone
    knows it but me!  I'm not sure I agree with the notion of having
    long-established relationships being a requirement for these kinds of
    discussions - though to be sure, I've learned that it makes it much
    easier for both.  I think the key thing Andrew was getting at is being
    careful not to put another on the defensive and (THE BIG LESSON I'M
    STILL LEARNING - OY!) to not immediately take the defensive when
    approached (MUCH easier said than done, sad to say...).
    
    I'm also not sure about the concept of SOAPBOX "polluting" believers. 
    That doesn't sit well with me on a number of levels.  True, we need to
    keep away from areas of temptation and there's much to be said for
    hanging around with a group of believers uplifting one another - but do
    you think Yeshua thought of Himself as being polluted when He was
    hanging around with tax collectors and prostitutes?
    
    Again - it boils down to balance (for me anyway).
    
    Interesting discussion!
    
    Steve

>    Again - it boils down to balance (for me anyway).

This bore repeating.

    re: .27
    
    So repeat it, why don't ya?
    
    ;-)

Balance, balance, balance, balance, balance, balance...

    RE:29
    
    Mark you sound like Mr. Miagi.;)
    
    Jim

 Well, I think I get the point, but just what does it all boil down to?

 :-)





 Jim

>    Mark you sound like Mr. Miagi.;)

I might smile, too, if I knew to whom you referred. 

MM

>    Mark you sound like Mr. Miagi.;)

I might smile, too, if I knew to whom you referred. 

MM

    It looks like Mark M. double clicked one too many times. :-)
    
    If I recall, Mr. Miagi is the karate master that teaches the kid in the
    Karate Kid series.
    
    Mark L.

re: Karate Kid(s)

Never saw the movie.

Balance is not the property of an eastern religious thought, and if
it happens that some eastern religious proverb brings to you a new
discovery, remember that "there is nothing new under the sun."

MM

	At least in the BOX one can talk about all the different views they may
have and not just one version. How can anyone learn anything, to know what they
are dealing with if they only see one view. While there are many in here who
have written in the BOX, and even though I may not agree with their views on 
many things, I will say that they way you presented yourselves in there was very
tolerable towards other people's views. If your version of the "message" was to 
get out to the masses, the way it was handled was perfect. Most people talked, 
and then used some scripture to show why they believe as they do. There wasn't 
a lot of shouting for the most part (as far as the Christian side is concerned 
:-) and while you did have some who may be viewd as non_Christian by some that 
made it a point to mention thump thump thump on a regular basis, most I thought 
had some good conversations. Hmmm.... maybe I should clarify that, by good 
conversations I mean dialogue happened, not that anyone from either side
persuaded the other (although it could have happened...:-)


Glen

    Steve,
    
    When personal relationships begin to develop with non-believers it's
    time for an exodus.  We are not to be yoked up with unbelievers and
    that is something to be cautious about when participating in SOAPBOX.
    
    As long as one maintains their distance, yet acceptance [the word
    balance comes to mind] in such a forum, then AMEN.  But I also believe
    in one knowing their weaknesses and not setting up themselves up to
    fail. :-) :-)
    
    Nancy
    

.38

That's balance, too, Nancy.  :-)

    -1
    
    Shhhh, don't say that too loud, I have a reputation to create.
    
    :-)
    Nancy

    re: .38
    Hmmmm, I dunno, Nancy.
    
    I've got personal relationships with many non-believers.  I don't seek
    their spiritual counsel in my life, but I enjoy their friendship and I
    trust they enjoy mine as well.  I don't think believers should marry
    non-believers....not because non-believers are "bad people" per se, but
    mostly because of the agony that will cause in a marriage - but
    friends?  I guess I don't see why an exodus is required?
    
    Can you 'splain?
    
    
    Thanks,
    
    Steve

    Yikes Steve, you bet I can, however, this week is a cruncher for me. 
    I'm on the Blitz for MVS campaign and am  s t r e t c h e d for time.
    I will get back to you though. :-)
    
    Nancy

I feel the same as Steve, and am also waiting to hear what you might
have to say on this Nancy.  I have many relationships with non-believers,
some are friends, some are family.  I continue to do things with them
and enjoy their company while also continuing to pray that they will come
God.

Leslie

I think the issue, if I may, is who is influencing whom.
Like television, you can watch some good TV (if you can find it),
and you can get some crud.  Some people have elected to trash 
the TV if they have found it to be a negatively influencing 
factor that pulls the balance (as we have been talking about)
out of whack so that values become insipidly muddied.  For those
of you who can drink alcohol without abuse, it isn't easy to 
understand how one chooses to refrain rather than struggle with
the balance.  For some of us, we may struggle more with balancing
than others do.  How many have we seen who can "handle it" only
to fail?  Or better, how many of you would say the same thing of
C-P versus the 'box?  There comes a time when a person needs to 
say, I need a break from this smoke-filled room to get some fresh
air and clear perspective.

Mark

be in the world but not of the world. He was always getting yelled at for 
being with the "sinners". With that example in mind, I choose to have "frends"
who are not Christians. I remember the one man that stood and wittnessed to
me via example while I put him through six months of HELL. Literally folks in
his church would get together and pray for him on Sunday morning and Wednesday
night for strength to deal with me. I am not proud of this but I will be
"Eternally" thankfull that he spent time building relationship with me.
When Jesus finaly got through to me, He was the first person I saught out for 
help. I accepted Jesus in his church and we became frends and allies. We still
laugh today about the first time he introduced me to the folks that prayed
for him. Wemon picked up their children and Men steped in front of their wives.
He and Jesus held on to me like a bull dog but it was his choice to follow
Jesus's prompting. He could have bailed out at anytime. That was 23 years ago
and just like it was yesterday. I thank God for Christians willing to  have
frends outside of the church. Those are the folks Jesus died for. He said
several times, "I only do what I see the Father doing". This tells me that
God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, ie GOD (3-1) are interisted in sinners
and so should we be. 

Dave

    Hey, as we say in the 'Box,                                       
    
    "Our yoke is easy & our burdensomeness is lite."  Or was that yokels? :-)
    
    Anyhow, I've just read thru this string and would respectfully, but
    selectively, :-) invite back to the 'Box those who demonstrated
    openness to frank discussions and exchanges of views.  Not, as someone
    stated before me herein, that it's likely that minds were actually
    changed (but it could happen!), but because (aside from all the
    badinage and trash) SoapBox is imho the one place in DEC CyberSpace
    that I've found that is most like Speaker's Corner in Hyde Park.  And
    you know how many preachers, politicians, anarchists, and rabble go
    there!  It's FUN!!!  
    
    Some of the separateness I read here struck me frankly as merely
    intellectual or theological timidity.  If you want to test your belief
    systems, air 'em out!  Don't preach blindly, come around with a sense
    of yourSELF and and a sense of HUMOR, stand up for YOUR beliefs.  
    
    This means you, Nancy... :-)  Good folks like you shouldn't stay calm
    ALL the time...  So when the "crunch" of REAL work lessens, drop by and
    give us what for, eh?
    
    But leave yer "thumper" friends back here, there's a friend...  :-)
    
    Dan

	Nancy, when you're at home you shouldn't be logging in!!!!! Although
the added characters in your notes are cool! :-)



Glen

			Is it morally appropriate for those who profess
	to be Christian believers in the Lord Jesus to actually criticize 
	someone for the simple act of obeying the words of Jesus Christ?
    	I don't think so.  In fact, I believe it is a sin.
    
			It is written:  "Ye are the salt of the earth".  
	But right afterwards, it is also written:

		"Ye are the light of the world.  A city set on a hill 
	cannot be hid.  Neither do men light a candle and put it under 
	a bushel, but on a candlestick; and gives light unto all that 
	are in the house."  ( Matthew 5:14,15 )

		I don't know about you folks, but it is impossible for 
	me to hide the light of Christ which burns within my spirit!!!
    
		Jesus said: "GO ye into ALL the world and preach the
	gospel to every creature.  He that believes and is baptized
	shall be saved and he that believes not shall be damned."
	( Mark 16:15,16 )

		I take the word "preach" as an imperative.  I am simply
	trying my best to obey what my Lord Jesus has said to do.  Now,
    	if I said something contrary to the Word, -please show me what
    	that might be.  If I said something against the Word, then that
    	is a sin that I need to account for.  But, if folks criticize me
    	contrary to the word, then that is a sin that they must account
    	for!   
    
    		Paul said: "And all things are of God who has reconciled
	us to himself by Jesus Christ, and has given to us the ministry 
	of reconciliation; to wit, that God was in Christ, not imputing 
	their trespasses unto them; and has committed unto us the word 
	of reconciliation.  Now then, we are ambassadors for Christ, as 
	though God did beseech you by us; we pray you in Christ's stead,
	be ye reconciled to God." (2 Corinthians 5:18)

		God has given the church, ( His body ), a commission to
	preach the gospel!!!  If the church does not do its job, then the
	job will not get done, (  period )!! Paul said: "Faith comes by 
	hearing and hearing by the Word of God".  If they do not hear the 
	Word of God, - then it is *impossible* for faith to come to them,
	( - and they are not going to get by a mystery process of osmosis ),  
	-because the only way that faith can come is for them to hear the
	Word of God.  "How shall they believe in him of whom they have not 
	heard?"  And, if they do not believe, then they will not get saved.  
	And, if they do not get saved, then they will die in their sins,
	and they will go to hell.  Does that bother you?!   At that time
	their lives would have already been wasted, but the one question
	that they will never be able to place before me is: why didn't
	you tell me?  I told them.  They did not like it.  But I did not 
    	kiss up to them, or compromise about the Word of Truth, or go 
    	handing out false kudos, or go fishing for vain compliments.  I
    	laid the Word on the line to them the way the good book says:
    	"Repent and believe the gospel!!"
    
	What I preached in the SOAPBOX was very straightforward along the 
	line of the Word of God which says:

	"all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God" 	    (Rom. 3:23)
	"wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life" (Rom. 6:23)
	"ye must be born again" 				    (John 3:3)
	"lest ye be born again not shall ye enter the kingdom"	    (John 3:5)


		I've talked with fellow Christians who have read the
	note, and they all agree that I started off very gently and very
	carefully, -and only got tougher as people in soapbox started 
	getting very rude towards the Word of God and towards me.  It
	seems that some people over there just thrive on trying to bash
	Christians!  -But, that does not mean that the Word is ineffective
	or that people reading that note will not benefit from seeing it.
	I've also spoken with other Christians who say that before you
    	go accusing a Christian, ( particularly over a subjective issue
    	such as frivolous and whimsical as ~style~ ), you _must_, ( acc.
    	to the authority of the scriptures ), be able to:
    
	a.) Prove that you went to that brother privately about the issue.
	b.) Demonstrate that he would not hear you, ( and even when you
		brought someone else along to listen with you ).
	c.) Demonstrate that you were blameless in the matter.
	d.) Be able to prove that what the brother did was a sin and why.

		Has any one here done that?  The answer is flat out no.
	The fact is, I have not committed a sin by preaching the Word over 
	in Soapbox.  Now, some may criticize my style, -but at least I
	did something about the need to hear the Word of God over there.
	Also, I kept it close to what the Word says, and I did not see
	anyone debating chapter and verse over there, - so I know that I
	know that I know these subjective allegations and criticisms 
	are certainly _not_ from the Spirit of the Lord.

		Once again, I reiterate, "but if you have bitter envying
	and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the 
	truth.  This wisdom descends not from above, but is earthly,
	sensual, _devilish_ ( demonic )".  ( James 3:14,15 )

								/Greg

    Jesus Christ was more of a teacher than a preacher and his lesson was
    one of love and grace.  Beating the secular world over the head with a 
    fire & brimstone message of performance and legalism isn't really the
    best approach.  You didn't ask this Christian, but I don't believe you
    initiated your witness in a gentle manner.  You weren't even honest
    about it since you started condemning the whole lot from an anonymous
    VAX account.
    
    Jesus Christ's message is most effective in matters of the heart.  Your
    fear tactics will only save those that literally fear burning in hell.
    
    regards,
    Mike

    Good note Mike.
    
    Proverbs come to mind, Mike.  If more Christians would apply wisdom in
    their witness, there'd be less rejection of Christ. 
    
    A *soft* answer rns away wrath.
    Every man thinks his own way is right, but the Lord ponders the heart.
    
    Nancy

	Greg, wasn't your first note over there in all capital letters? How was
that soft and gentle?


Glen

	By first note I meant the very first one entered. I remember people
doing the thump thump thump after they read it. You had set your standard with
that note and from that time people were leary of you.


Glen

    re: .49
    
    Your note makes it clear you feel some are criticizing you.  You refer
    to that as "sin".  You discuss the Matt. 18 principle.
    
    Let's back up for a second.
    
    1) Where in this string has any believer criticized you, or, for that
    matter, even mentioned your name?
    
    2) Where in the Word does it say that it is a sin to ask questions that
    we might sharpen one another as iron sharpens iron?
    
    3) If you feel as wronged as .49 would indicate, to what extent have
    you yourself followed the Matthew 18 principle?
    
    
    Steve

   >>           <<< Note 263.53 by DEMING::SILVA "Memories....." >>>
   



>>                                                You had set your standard with
>> that note and from that time people were leary of you.
    	Hmmmm. Sounds like a familiar tune. Now, where have I heard this
    before? Hmmmm.
    

	Don't know Phil..... where did you see that???? 



Glen

    		Can anyone show me in the N.T. where the message of 
	salvation was separated from the message of repentance?  Did
	not John, Jesus, Paul, Peter, _all_ preach repentance from 
	dead works and unbelief?   What about the 70 that Jesus sent
	out to preach the good news?  Did they preach repentance, or
	did they preach a lukewarm, watered down version of a liberal
	love cult which blends in quite well with Eastern Religion, 
	Hinduism, and a one world religion?!  I mean, either we go by
	the Word, or we go by the world.  Either we set the standards
	by the Word, or we let the standard be set by the world.  We
	have to set the standards according to the Word.  The Word 
	preaches "repentance".   Did the message change?

		In Acts, when preaching with the Ephesians, Paul
	said: "But now God COMMANDS MEN EVERYWHERE TO REPENT and to 
	believe".  That is God's Word.  Did it change?!  I don't
	think so!

			If you take a look at Mark Chapter 6, you'll 
	see that the disciples that Jesus sent out, ( when he sent the 
	70 out in groups of two ), what did they preach?!  "And they 
	went out and preached that men should REPENT", ( Mark 6:12 ).  
	If Jesus' first 70 disciples preached "repentance", then 
	should not his next 70?  And the 70 after that?  And the
	many 70's after that?  Did Jesus' message change?  Did Jesus
	chide his disciples for preaching _repentance_?  What about
    	John the Baptist?  Did Jesus chide him for preaching "repent"?
    	He called him a bright and shining light. 

			What did Jesus say would become of those who 
	would not hear them?  "It shall be more tolerable for Sodom 
	and Gomorrha in the day of judgement than for that city", 
	( Mark 6:11 ). 

		When you tell someone to repent there is going to
	be _confrontation_ because repentance means that someone has
	to change.  Sin has to be confronted.  The sin that I was con-
	fronting is unbelief.  "Whatsoever is not of faith is sin", 
	( Romans 14:29b ).  Confrontation of sin is NECESSARY in order 
	for the Holy Spirit to bring "conviction" of sin.  Jesus said, 
	"had I not come to them, they would have had no sin, but now 
	they have no cloak for their sin."  

			I heard what the unbelievers said about me.
	People called me some pretty foul stuff over there.  For example,
	one fellow wrote "CRAP" as a base reply.  Another called me a
	"thumper".  Another called me a "wuss".  Another reply said
	"open season on 'fundies'".   Now, in the interest of keeping
	the message free from evil appearance, how would you have res-
	ponded?!!! Right from the start the responses were sarcastic,
	rude, bigoted, antiChristian, etc.!!  How would you have res-
	ponded?!   There were people there that were talking about
	fictitious gods that they made up for themselves.  Other people
	started talking about the mating habits of African pygmy ele-
	phants.  Their rejection of the gospel message was evident, but
	they were also proactively spouting out rudeness simply to pre-
	vent anyone from having a reasonable and sensible discussion.
	People were _abusing_ God's Word, but did anyone from this note
	stand up and say, "Yes, I believe in the Bible.  Yes, it is 
	God's Word!"   Most of you guys were in your closet.  Well,
    	- no guts, no glory!

			Do you know what they testified of Paul?  They
	said, "These are the men that are turning the world upside down."
	Look at how badly he was treated for preaching the gospel.  The
	early disciples were _all_ martyred for their faith.  There was
	conflict there.  The world does not want to hear a confrontational
	message of repentance.  The world wants to maintain the status
	quo.  It wants to "keep things the same".  It does not want any-
	one to rock the boat.  Why?  Because, when people rock the boat, 
	that is often the catylyst necessary to get positive change.

			Think about it: if you were bound and intent on
	disbelief, doubt, doing your own thing, running your course, and
	someone kept bugging you with the message of Jesus Christ, -you
	would probably get really angry, exasperated, and frustrated with
	them.  You would probably say some pretty unkind things about them
	also.  But, - if you got saved later because it was always on your
	mind, and you could not stop thinking about it, and you were con-
	vinced that that person was right in what they were saying, then
	you would not be angry - you would be grateful because that was 
	the one person that cared enough about you to confront you and to
	try to bring you into the fold.  Right?  And what would you testify
	about that person?  You would say - 'yeah... that person really did
	love me because they had the guts to risk being abused in order to
	help me'.  

    		BTW, salt is also used as a preservative to keep things
    	from getting spoiled.

 This is a polite reminder, that as Christians we have enough problems
 with the judgeing and bashing we get from the world.  I would prefer
 that we not use this refuge from the world as a place to judge other
 Christians, or the depth of their committment to the Lord, or to 
 debate who said what to whom and how in another notes conference.


 If there is to be a debate as to an individual's noting or evangelistic
 style, perhaps it can be taken to mail?



 Jim

    
    	Hi Jim,
    
    			Exellent!  Please close 263. 
    
    								/Greg
    

    Jim's gentle admonishment in .59 is a good one.  However, I don't
    believe that the answer is to close the topic.  This topic was started
    in a "generic" sense, without pointing to any individual, but rather an
    inquiry/discussion as to the methods of witness in other notes
    conferences (arising specifically out of SOAPBOX), where quite a number
    of Christians have/had been active.  This *is* a valid topic of
    discussion here.  But as well, it is probably inappropriate in this
    conference to turn it into a matter of individual criticism.  As Jim
    suggested, matters of individual (hopefully constructive and loving)
    criticism are best carried out through mail rather than notes.

    Mark L. (co-mod)

    I happen to agree with my two co-mods.  I don't think this is the place
    to debate this.
    
    Greg, if you would like to discuss this with me in mail, I will do so
    wtih some guidelines for the discussion.
    
    Nancy

    
    	New moderators of Yukon::Christian et al,
    
    				I commit this problem into the hands of
    		Jesus Christ in the Name of Jesus, and I will let HIM
    		handle it.
    						Thanks,
    
    								Greg

    Thanks Greg.
    
    I'm still open for a mail discussion if you'd like.
    
    Nancy

    
    
    The real issue, in my opinion, is one of how the 'box works.  Greg, you
    jumped right in, without even introducing yourself, and climbed on your
    pulpit.  Soapbox is full of cliques and groups.  Get involved in some
    group, participate in many different discussions, not just the one that
    really, and ultimately, interests you, and you might then be listened
    to.
    
    If wasn't so much what you said -- it was your approach in that forum.
    
       GJD

    Greg, preaching repentance is fine, but it's mainly your style I don't
    agree with.  I use to try to witness to people like that too.  YOU'RE A
    SINNER.  YOU'RE NOTHING WITHOUT JESUS.  YOU'RE GOING TO HELL, REPENT AND 
    BE SAVED!  The only people that came to Christ that way were those that 
    feared Hell and/or had severe low self-esteem.
    
    You can still preach repentance while emphasizing God's grace and love
    and the debt paid by His Son for us on the cross.  We are not saved by
    our performance.  We are saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ.
    There is not a single thing we can do to perform our way to heaven.  It
    is only by the grace of God and His atonement.  Incidentally, I've
    found that many more people repent and believe when you deals with
    matters of the heart/soul in this manner.  People longed to be loved. 
    Bashing them over the head and reminding them of their fallibility in a
    brutal way doesn't go very far.
    
    Mike

	Hmmm... come to think of it greg, when you first flew into SB you went
under some generic account name without even using your own. Why wouldn't
people be a bit freaked by it?


| People called me some pretty foul stuff over there.  For example, one fellow 
| wrote "CRAP" as a base reply.  

	Greg, if you noticed, the same person writes CRAP in almost every topic
over there at least once! No need for you to think he was singling you out.

| Another called me a "thumper".  

	He also called a few other people the same thing. But they explained
things in a way to this person that showed them they believed what they were
saying, but they weren't trying to shove it done anyones throat. 

| People were _abusing_ God's Word, but did anyone from this note stand up and 
| say, "Yes, I believe in the Bible.  Yes, it is God's Word!"   Most of you 
| guys were in your closet.  

	NOT ME!!!!! :-)  I don't understand this Greg. Those who did believe in
the Word of God said so over and over again. Hmmmmm..... 

| Well, - no guts, no glory!

	It would seem more like another baseless accusation on your part.

| And what would you testify about that person?  You would say - 'yeah... that 
| person really did love me because they had the guts to risk being abused in 
| order to help me'.  

	Greg, there is a MAJOR difference between someone coming to your rescue
and someone not. To begin with people backed a lot of what you had to say. But
just from reading anyone can see that there is a major difference in what you
believe compared to the other Christians. If they don't defend that, don't
worry about it. Everyone is capable of making mistakes. If their belief doesn't
= yours, then either they are right or you (although the 3rd option is both are
wrong). But let's not rip someone apart because their belief in God doesn't
match yours.




Glen

    Greg, in addition to what I've already posted in here, Mark M. alluded
    to some important background information as well.  Your past
    contributions in CHRISTIAN still cause us to react cautiously.
    
    Mike

    Greg,
    
    Would you please answer the questions in .54?  Off-line is fine if you
    wish.
    
    Steve

That is not what I have said.  Please reread it and answer my questions.
Please clarify.

Let me also ask your understanding of what it means to forgive, Greg.
And the repentence you offer.  What is your understanding?

You are sorry for "offending" my feelings?  I hold nothing against you
in regards to my feelings.  Consider this forgiven.

But I would rather to see you were sorry for the wrong you
committed, which has very little to do with my (or anyone's) feelings.
How can you be forgiven if you do not repent of it?  Please clarify 
these issues without the generalities, if you can.

Mark

    
    Greg,
    
    >        As far as the "lie from the devil" statement - I forget the
    >        context in which it was said...........
    
      Interesting comment.
    
    >        Anyways, that "lie from the devil" reference offended
    >         you, and I apologize for that.
    
      In light of the above statement, is this a sincere apology????
    
    Dan

    I think that the conversation between Mark and Greg needs to be kept
    between Mark and Greg.   IMHO.
    
    Nancy

The intent of this note was not to discuss or confront individuals.  
It was to discuss, in general terms, the presentation of the gospel outside 
the 'Christian' context.

As such, the personal differences raised in the previous notes are
unedifying and inappropriate for public airing.  Please take any such
discussion offline until you have resolved your differences and apologies, 
as appropriate.

Thank you

							Andrew Yuille
							co-moderator

    	Hi Andrew,
    
    		Sorry.  Looks like a stick to the issue warning.
    	Fine.  All right...  here is one thing that really concerns
    	me...   There are lots of nonChristian religious groups that 
	preach love, compassion, peace, good works, kindness, hospitality, 
	and many other good things.  One particular group has a leader
	who calls himself "Da Free John", and one of his disciples 
	really worked hard to try to lead my family into her religion but 
    	failed.  
    
    		It all started when she gave my wife a book.  It had all 
	kinds of really "easy to get along with" type of material in
	it, platitudes, 'practical' advice, etc.  Anyways...  
    
    		My wife started reading their book, and I blocked my ear
	to it because I felt like there were seducing spirits that
	were trying to operate through the reading of this book.  I
	quoted John 14:6, and walked out of the bedroom.  Anyways...

		The woman said that their group believes that Westerners
	make love in a vulgar and shallow way, and that true love making 
	should last for many hours, and involves all parts of the total
	person.  They said that Jesus was only a 3rd level prophet, and
	that their prophet was a 7th level, and was higher than Jesus
	spiritually.  They are extremely "evangelical-like" in methods.
	Except- they do not acknowledge that there even exists a sin issue.
	They do not ask people to repent from dead works.  They just claim
	that sin will simply dissolve over time.  They avoid issues of right
	and wrong.  There is little to no confrontation.  They avoid all
	conflict, and they are extremely spiritual in nature.  Yet, they 
	are Christless.  They do not offer salvation.  They do not believe
	in the need to be saved.  And, there is some wierd power there
	that I just do not really understand.

		I picked the book that they gave my wife, and I felt 
	these extremely sensual love feelings encircle my hand, and then 
	just start working their way up my arm.  It was _extremely_ 
	sensual.  I felt like there was an attempt to seduce me, and that
	I could not even see what it was that was trying to seduce me!
    	I could make some jokes about that, but it would not be
    	appropriate.  There was _something_ there...  anyways...

		I dropped the book down.   I hid it in my car trunk, and
	drove it back to the house of the woman who gave it to my wife.
	The woman who gave it to her was not home, - thank God.  But I 
	left it on her doorstep.  My wife explained why, and sure enough,
	they began saying that I was "extremely sensitive" and reinforced
	their efforts to try to "evangelize" us.  ( Tell us about your
    	husband's "experience", please?!  Argggg....  I sort of wished
    	I said nothing about it because that only got them coming after
    	me, even more... )  Anyways, I had had enough of being on the
    	defensive and avoiding them, etc.  It was time to turn things
    	around.  That's right, it was time to get a bit "offensive".

			I started sending them letters explaining the
	sin issue, and the need for the blood of Jesus, and the importance
	of getting reconciled with God, and why sin does not go away without
	the shedding of blood, and why what Jesus did was so important.  I
	sent several of them, and they got offended and decided to finally 
	stop trying.  

		Strangely enough, their 'guru' came and preached in
	my home town area, in a Christian community church.  That night 
	I got a fever, and an incredible headache, also.  It was really
	strange.  I could not understand why Christians would let this
	man come in and take over?

		Now, I know that there are more religions and "teachers"
	like that out there.  The thing is, how does one differentiate 
	Christianity from other religions to unbelievers, without hitting 
	on the sin issue, and the need to cleanse the conscience with 
	sprinking of blood?  Certainly, if a person just wants love,
	it seems that these folks sure do a pretty good job of loving.

		How do you tell about Jesus without being upfront and
	honest about the sin issue?

								/Greg
                                  

	Mark, it is very easy to see what you are looking for (which you did
illistrate perfectly with the chalk line story) but I'm not sure if Greg will
ever understand it. It doesn't seem to matter who asks him, he doesn't seem to
realize that his judgements against others are in a lot of cases false. I look
at this in the same light of your belief in the Bible. No one is going to be
able to change your mind as it is something you truly believe in. I think greg
is doing the same in this case.



Glen

    What was it that they said in the 'Box about "active listening"?

    Re: .88 (Greg)
    
>		How do you tell about Jesus without being upfront and
>	honest about the sin issue?
    
    "And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all
    men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose
    themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the
    acknowledging of the truth; And that they may recover themselves out
    of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will."
    (II Tim. 2:24-26)
    
    I heard a (true) story about a place where "revival" meetings were
    being held.  There were two men doing the preaching.  Both spoke on the
    matters of sin and hell, and the need for repentance and salvation
    through Jesus Christ.  Yet the response toward the messages from one of
    the speakers was much greater than toward that of the other.  When
    asked why this was so, someone answered something to the effect of "The
    one preaches as if he wants men and women to escape hell.  The other
    preaches as if he wants them to go there."
    
    The way that the message is presented can make all the difference.
    
    Mark L.

>		How do you tell about Jesus without being upfront and
>	honest about the sin issue?

In a short answer - you don't.  If we're not sinners, then we don't need a
Savior.  I haven't followed all that has gone on in Soapbox or in this note, but
I doubt that people have been saying that we should not preach repentance,
though you may have taken it that way.  But preaching repentance doesn't always
mean laying on the fire and brimstone - though again I'm not applying that
directly to you because I haven't read the things you wrote in Soapbox.

There are some people who come to know the Lord out of fear of eternal
punishment, like some sort of cosmic insurance policy - believe now, and be
saved later.  But I think most people come to the Lord when they become sick of
their own sin.  It's at the point when a person finally comes to the realization
that they simply cannot be the person they want to be, that they become open to
their need for a Savior.  Our task in spreading the Gospel is 1) to bring people
to the point where they are sick of their sin, through the conviction of the
Holy Spirit, and 2) Introduce them to the Savior they suddenly know they need.  
Step 1) is much harder than step 2).

The problem is that people are very different, and for each person, the way to
go about step 1) is different.  For many people, it needs to be a more gradual
process, a dawning realization of the truth of Romans 7 "For the good that I
wish, I do not do; but I practice the very evil I do not wish"7:19, NAS.  Most
people have their 'shields up' against anyone who would directly confront their
sin, but if they see someone love them for the person they are, while at the
same time not validating their sin, it begins to knaw inside that they really
are missing something.  But it is also true that there are people who will be
reached *ONLY by an up-front, in-your-face "you will be damned for your sin"
approach.

Our problem is that we lack the discernment as to who needs which approach.  We
tend to have our own style of evangelism, and use it on everyone.  It's quite
true that some of us (and I'll include myself) take an approach that is often
TOO laid back.  There are times when being more forceful is necessary, and I'm
not likely to recognize those times.  Likewise, there are times - and I think
these are more frequent - where a more gentle approach is necessary.  Some
people - which may include you, Greg, though I don't know that first hand - who
have a more confrontative natural style may not recognize those times.  And I
think the reason other Christians may react to a more confrontative style is
that for those who it is NOT appropriate, it may actively turn them away from
examining the possibility that there is truth in Christ at a later time.

Paul

	Hi Chip,
    
			But, what if they do not believe that there even
	exists a hell?  What if they say that there is no substantiation,
    	no proof, no meaningful evidence to demonstrate that such a place
    	even exists?   What if they tell you that it is a contrived lie
	concocted specifically to scare them?   What if they tell you it 
    	is the central theme of a fear-based religious cult?  What if they 
    	tell you that a truly good and  righteous God would never send 
    	people to hell because He is too good and loving to do something 
    	like that?  And what if they spit on everything that you believe
    	in?

								/Greg

 RE .93

 One word..."Pray".


 YOU can't save them, only God through the Holy Spirit can convict them.
 In some cases, all you can do is plant the seed.




 Jim

	Nice note Jim. 



Glen

>			But, what if they do not believe that there even
>	exists a hell?  What if they say that there is no substantiation,
>    	no proof, no meaningful evidence to demonstrate that such a place
>    	even exists?   
    
    Interesting -- last week I was preaching on Luke 16, and the following
    really stood out to me:
     27 Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest
        send him to my father's house:
     28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest
        they also come into this place of torment.
     29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let
        them hear them.
     30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from
        the dead, they will repent.
     31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets,
        neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.
    
    If someone isn't willing to listen to God's Word, there's no way to
    persuade them.  Either they have so rejected the conviction of the Holy
    Spirit that they have "had their conscience seared", or it just isn't
    the time yet that the Holy Spirt has chosen to work on their hearts.
    
    Like Jim said, pray.
    
    Mark L.

 

 Wow....another example of the living and active Word of God..





 Jim

    Excellent Jim!  With the way God has been moving with your son lately,
    I'm sure you realize that more than ever.

.89 Glen

FYI,  you're wrong again.

>	Mark, it is very easy to see what you are looking for (which you did
>illistrate perfectly with the chalk line story) but I'm not sure if Greg will
>ever understand it. It doesn't seem to matter who asks him, he doesn't seem to
>realize that his judgements against others are in a lot of cases false. I look
>at this in the same light of your belief in the Bible. No one is going to be
>able to change your mind as it is something you truly believe in. I think greg
>is doing the same in this case.

Sorry you were not included, but the offline discussion revealed that 
Greg was able to change his mind, as the Bible says to renew your mind.
So Greg is not doing the same as you in this case.  At the very least,
he prayed about things over the past year and has demonstrated in words
that he has understood "it."

While none of us may make humungous changes, and are a product of many
changes and influences, I'd call it a major step forward, just to let you
and the Christian community know.

Now, Glen, about changing your mind...

Mark

P.S. Lest anyone think that I changed Greg's mind, perish the thought.  Glen, 
  you are right to say that no one will change your mind; you have to allow
  it to be changed.  

    Note 263.99 has been set hidden by moderator action.
    
    Mark L. co-mod

    
    	Jim,
    
    				Praise the Lord.  If you were to take a 
    	look at the Soapbox note #471. on node PEAR, and take a look at
    	some of the responses that _I_ got for simply stating what I 
    	believe, - you will see what kind of _abuse_ I took.   Yet, all I 
    	did was simply state my beliefs.   THAT was the response I got.  
    	Now, I have to ask you, how would you feel about that?   I know 
    	how I felt.  I felt really lousy about it, and I probably quoted
    	the same scriptures that you did.  Now... if they treated you like
    	that, do you think it would be appropriate to quote scriptures about
    	hell to them?  What if they called you a "thumper"?  What if they
    	said, "Where the hell are all these fundies coming from?" or...
    	What if they called you a fundy and said, "open season on the
    	fundies"?!  And, what if fellow Christians said you were being too 
    	hard on those poor unbelievers?  Would you feel doubly wronged, or
    	singly wronged?
    
    		    						/Greg		

.102  Greg

How did Jesus respond?

Luke 9
 52  And sent messengers before his face: and they went, and entered into a
village of the Samaritans, to make ready for him.
 53  And they did not receive him, because his face was as though he would go
to Jerusalem.
 54  And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt
thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as
Elias did?
 55  But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of
spirit ye are of.
 56  For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them.
And they went to another village.


Be therefore imitators of Christ Jesus.

    
    	Hi Mark,
    
    			But those people would not receive him because
    	he wanted to go to Jerusalem!  I believe that they simply did 
    	not want to see Him get hurt by the Jews - because they loved
    	Him.  Isn't there a bit of a difference between them, and for 
    	instance, the way he was treated in Jerusalem, Nazareth, Bethsaida,
    	and Chorazin?  
    
    								/Greg

>        Isn't there a bit of a difference between them, and for 
>    	instance, the way he was treated in Jerusalem, Nazareth, Bethsaida,
>    	and Chorazin?  
    
Bathe in verse 56, Greg.  This is a principle that applies throughout and
not to just this one area.

 56  For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them.
And they went to another village.

If it was meant only for this village, He would have said so, (as He did for
Chorazin), but he applied this to all men (you and me included).  Further,
Jesus pronounced woe on Chorazin to his disciples if the town did not repent.  
*IF*

Nineveh was doomed and judgment was on the way, but the city repented and 
was spared, to the irritation of Jonah.  See God's response to Jonah.

Jonah 4

  4  Then said the LORD, Doest thou well to be angry? 
  5  So Jonah went out of the city, and sat on the east side of the city, and
there made him a booth, and sat under it in the shadow, till he might see what
would become of the city.
  6  And the LORD God prepared a gourd, and made it to come up over Jonah,
that it might be a shadow over his head, to deliver him from his grief. So
Jonah was exceeding glad of the gourd.
  7  But God prepared a worm when the morning rose the next day, and it smote
the gourd that it withered.
  8  And it came to pass, when the sun did arise, that God prepared a
vehement east wind; and the sun beat upon the head of Jonah, that he fainted,
and wished in himself to die, and said, It is better for me to die than to
live.
  9  And God said to Jonah, Doest thou well to be angry for the gourd? And he
said, I do well to be angry, even unto death.
 10  Then said the LORD, Thou hast had pity on the gourd, for the which thou
hast not laboured, neither madest it grow; which came up in a night, and
perished in a night:
 11  And should not I spare Nineveh, that great city, wherein are more than
sixscore thousand persons that cannot discern between their right hand and
their left hand; and also much cattle?

Think about mercy and what it means.

Mark

    
    	Hi Mark,
    
    			You make an exellent point about the purpose,
    	and I agree about the purpose.   Do you think that preaching
    	"that men should repent", ( Mark 6:12 ), is still applicable
    	today, or that it alienates people and turns them off to the
    	gospel message?
    
    								/Greg

    .106 Greg
    
    Preaching, as I understand it, is a call for some but not for all.
    The question to answer is "have I been called to preach?"  
    And if so, "where have I been sent to preach?"
    
    Some people will go abroad, some to the inner city, and some to care
    for a "flock" at home. Still others may have specific calls, like Jonah
    to Nineveh (Scripture doesn't record that he went anywhere else), or a
    battle to wage, like Gideon. Some will be called for longer "jobs."
    All are called to obedience.  "Obedience to what command?" is not the
    question, but "obedience to Whom?" is the question.
    
    I posted a story once my father told me of an Indian Christian who
    spoke at his church.  I'll try to be brief. ;-)
    
    God told this man to preach on a street corner.  He said, "I can't do
    that."  God responded, "Why not?"  He said, "I would feel foolish."
    God responded, "You are foolish but you would be more foolish not to
    obey Me."  A person who knew the Lord, knew that He was right.  He did
    ask the Lord for one thing.  He said, "I will do as you say but I will
    go to the street corner and shut my eyes and sing, and if anyone is
    standing around when I am finished, I will speak to them."
    
    To his surprize, there was a small crowd gathered when he opened his
    eyes.  A curious thing happened.  He didn't know what to say!  Surely
    God should have put something eloquent into his mouth.  He fumbled a
    few words, grabbed his satchel and left the scene.  On his way home,
    God spoke to him again.  "Not bad.  Now I want you to go back
    tomorrow."
    
    He did, but on his way there, a Muslim (or marxist, I can't remember)
    grabbed him by the elbow and said, "tell me more of what you said
    yesterday."  
    
    The Indian Christian said to the college audience that this person had
    no business getting saved.  But he didn't do it; his feeble preaching
    didn't do it; his song didn't do it.  He was merely used by God as an
    instrument; obedient.
    
    Eloquent words won't do it.  Poor words won't do it.  A response in
    obedience to a call will because God uses us.  To my knowledge, this
    man was not called back to that street corner.  He still has many
    ministries (that we might consider too menial for the president of a
    major ministry).  If he is called back to the street corner, I believe
    he would go without the first discussion he had with God.  But God was
    patient.
    
    The point is that we are all called to obedience, but God calls some to
    preach, some to teach, and some to evangelize (Ephsians 4:11).
    He may call us to sweep a street and perchance meet someone who needs
    only an encouraging word, for some plant and sow, while others water,
    and other reap.  Whatever we do, be it plant, sow, water, or reap, we
    have done nothing of note except to obey.  See Luke 17:7-10, especially
    verse 10:
    
    "So likewise ye, when ye shall have done all those things which are
    commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants: we have done that
    which is our duty to do."
    
    More later.
    
    Mark

    Re: Note 263.102 by 38643::GRIFFIS
    
>   	"Where the hell are all these fundies coming from?"
    
    Idle thoughts... How many are we?  What would happen if we all dropped
    into the discussions at once, and managed to reply in a constructive
    way?  Ahh - that's the difficult bit.  I'm not confident enough to do
    that as an individual; but how about coordinated replies?
    
    Any takers for a private members notes conference to discuss and build
    appropriate reply text by committee?  If we do it as a group we are
    less likely to insult, degrade and fail to love.
    
    James

I have voluntarily hidden my own notes .65, .70, .72, .74, .78, .80, and
.84 and consider this matter closed.  My apologies to those who only witness
a small portion of the issue and resolution by having it brought into the
public eye.  My non-apologies for future readers who will not get to see
the hidden notes.

Mark Metcalfe

.109  James...    

>    Any takers for a private members notes conference to discuss and build
>    appropriate reply text by committee?  If we do it as a group we are
>    less likely to insult, degrade and fail to love.

I do not think this would work out well, James.  Imagine a response from
XXXXX::Christian_committee.  We would be less likely to come with any
response at all.

I think people need to realize that Christians are people, just like anyone
else with an important exception - born of the spirit.  I know that a jargonistic 
phrase that non-Christians don't understand, but that's not my point.

My point is that Jesus needs to be seen in the person whose walk is
immature, and imperfect, just as much as it needs to be seen in one 
who can reply without insult, degredation, and failure to love.
Failures do occur in Christian live, and I am certainly NOT excluding
myself.  But there is a difference and a hope to convey.

I wince at Christians who poorly portray Christ; those who are more mature
should endeavor to help us.  (Those who think they are mature might do well
to check with the Master, first.)  I chafe at people who claim Christ but
exhibit, not a poor portrayal but, a severe lack of knowldge about Christ
by their anti-Christian portrayal.  The former doesn't know any better but
is trying to learn be like Jesus; the latter thinks they've learned and
labels some very unchristian things as Christian.  The former will grow in
grace and in time; the latter will shrivel, and worse.

More thoughts later...

Mark

are Horses built by a committee. As we all must learn to be better 
representatives of Jesus Christ would it be beneficial to hold an "after hour"
on line "what is the appropriate response" note? That way all the SCRIPTURAL
answers could be cataloged and folks might pick up pointers where there may have
been misunderstanding on their part and affermation wrere they were right on.


Dave

| <<< Note 263.100 by TOKNOW::METCALFE "Eschew Obfuscatory Monikers" >>>



| >	Mark, it is very easy to see what you are looking for (which you did
| >illistrate perfectly with the chalk line story) but I'm not sure if Greg will
| >ever understand it. It doesn't seem to matter who asks him, he doesn't seem to
| >realize that his judgements against others are in a lot of cases false. I look
| >at this in the same light of your belief in the Bible. No one is going to be
| >able to change your mind as it is something you truly believe in. I think greg
| >is doing the same in this case.

| Sorry you were not included, but the offline discussion revealed that
| Greg was able to change his mind, as the Bible says to renew your mind.
| So Greg is not doing the same as you in this case.  

	Errrrr..... Mark, why must you drag me into every conversation that we
have? Can you hold a single conversation about a topic without dragging me into
it? I left my text above. Show me where it is about me. Maybe if you could get
past this you would be able to hold intelligent conversations where dialogue
flows and not well Glen this and Glen that. Try it sometime..... oh yeah,
that's right, I have this agenda thing..... maybe someday you'll convince me of
it, but until then, I think I know why I do the things I do.....

| At the very least, he prayed about things over the past year 

	Mark, are you assuming I haven't? You'd be very wrong if you were....

| and has demonstrated in words that he has understood "it."

	Mark, whether or not I agree with you on everything really doesn't
matter. My belief system is different than yours. That's plain to see. There
are some things we do agree on and if I have to agree with everything you think
to be considered understanding, then I hate to clue you in, but it ain't gonna
happen.

| Now, Glen, about changing your mind...

	About what Mark? 

| P.S. Lest anyone think that I changed Greg's mind, perish the thought.  Glen,
| you are right to say that no one will change your mind; you have to allow
| it to be changed.

	Offer something concrete to back your claims Mark. It never ceases to
amaze me how anyone can use something that is in question as proof that it is
correct. 



Glen

    	       	I look back at what I wrote in 471.0 of soapbox, and all
    	it was was a simple statement of beliefs.  In fact, it was so close 
    	to the Apostle's and Nicene Creed - that wouldn't you know it, John
    	Covert practically wrote the same thing by including one of the
    	Creeds.  That was edifying because I did not see the parallel lines
    	until after he showed it.
    
    		I don't know...(!)
    
    		Perhaps, these folks were already defensive.  Perhaps,
    	they were already fed up with hearing it.  I don't know.  Perhaps,
    	they were already sick of hearing the gospel, and were at the point 
    	where they just wanted to lash out with all they had against 
    	"the way"?   
    
    		Once I set foot in there, it was terrible.  It was sort of like
    	stepping on a loaded mine ready to be triggered with the accumulated
    	vehemence of a thousand megatons of furious screaming meemies.
    	They turned loose the built up anger within them, "Aha!! Another one!" 
     	"Lets Get 'em, boys."  "Yah... open season on fundies!"  
    
    		I do not think I really needed to prime them either,
    	because one of the first things they said was, "Where the hxxx are
    	all these fundies coming from?"  They were already wired.  The thing is:
    	the basenote was very sound and very reasonable.  It was not
    	filled with "hell and damnation" "fire and brimstone" preaching!!
    	I thought it was actually pretty neat and wanted to share it
    	because there were alot of explanations about the how/why/wherefore
    	of the Bible, ( i.e., there was alot of reasoning in it intended to
    	cast down arguments/pretensions, and every high thing", 2 Cor.10:4)
    	It was not intended to be a preaching, - it was a teaching meant to
    	become a discussion.  But, alot of folks "lost it" and went on the
    	warpath the minute it was entered!  It was like primitive tribal 
    	cannibals prepared to chase down the missionary in the jungle.
    	"Dr. Livingston, I presume stepping out of the jungle gloom..."
    	It was like wild savages who simply wanted to scalp the fundy and 
    	hold up the booty of a fresh and bloody scalp, and scream,
    	AYAYAYAYAY!!!!"  It was like Wild Western cowboys ready to gun 
    	down another one and say, "Put another notch on your gun, boys,
    	we got ourselves another fundy".  It was like circling vultures
    	waiting, hoping, expecting, and licking their little beaks.
    
    			But... they did not get me, ( - now, I did get a
    	got a fine collection of used buckshot, emptied shells, and bullets
    	that missed the target ).  What I want to know, however, ( excuse
    	me while I get my baseball bat ), is _who_ _got_ 'em so _wired_?!!
    									8-)
    								/Greg

    
    >>What I want to know, however, ( excuse	me while I get my baseball
    >>bat ), is _who_ _got_ 'em so _wired_?!!
    
        Ummmm,  If you had bothered to "get to know" the conference a
    little bit before jumping in with your preaching (which was really more
    like yelling), you'd understand that you were being treated,
    essentially, like any other new comer.  Have you read any other notes
    in the 'box other than the strings in which you have participated?  
    
        GJD

.112  Glen

Your reply makes no sense.

"looe rbbdfijhb rbvvbrhv  bdgirei dbbdie biemlapd f rhooinn  eohd"

    	I'll get the last laugh, though.  As they line up on judgement
    	day, I'll greet them and hand them tracts which say, "This is what
    	you should have known, and this is where you went wrong..."

    That's how SOAPBOX is. Most people are there to argue. They don't
    really seem to listen to alternative points of view - I have yet to see
    anyone publicly admit to having changed their views as a direct
    consequence of someone else's reasoned argument. Privately, perhaps
    they do, but for the most part they would never admit to it.
    
    That's the way that the conference is. They argue about anything that
    happens to matter to them and things get very heated. At such times,
    they are likely to get personal.
    There are also those who just want to irritate, to get rid off
    aggression and to spoil notes that they don't agree with. Heckling, I
    suppose you could call it. 
    Basically it's a free-for-all where, as long as you don't offend the
    Policies and Procedures, you can say what you like.
    
    I don't believe that every new note there is rat-holed by the
    Christians, as was claimed. That was a gross exaggeration. I don't
    often read the conference, and can't keep up to date with ALL the
    notes, but many of those that I HAVE read don't mention religion at
    all. 
    
    I don't think it was the religious message portrayed so much as a new
    victim to wind up! If it wasn't religion, it would be gun-control,
    abortion, terrorism - anything at all. 
    
    So - you asked who got them so much on edge. SOAPBOX is a very worldly
    conference and we all know who's in the world, don't we?! I bet
    he thrilled at every insult!
    
    Finally, remember that they mocked Christ too.

    
    		Actually, I think Soapbox is sort of like playing king of
    	the rathole.

>    		Actually, I think Soapbox is sort of like playing king of
>    	the rathole.
    
    I like it!  Well put!  Seems there's many "would-be" kings there, too.

    re: .116
    
    I don't think any believers will be laughing as non-believers are cast
    out of His presence.
    
    If our motivation is to prove a point or to be able to say "i told you
    so" in the end, I think we're missing the point.  We shoudln't spread
    the message to prove we're right, we should love the lost and in
    compassion for them and in thanksgiving for what He's done for us (and
    them) reach out.
    
    That's pretty bad grammar, but I hope it's clear.
    
    Steve

    Re .121
    
    I don't remember who it was, but there was one well known
    evangelist/preacher who said, "All I want is a mission station 10 feet
    from the gate of hell."  i.e., he wanted to be able to deliver people
    from going there, up to the last minute.  An admirable burden, IMHO.
    
    Mark L.

    I'd also like to point out that the written word is very easily
    mis-interpreted. That's why we have those :-) signs.
    I got quite friendly with an American from the Boston area through
    notes. We corresponded and mis-understandings were common - partly
    because of out different nationalities. Then he phoned me a couple of
    times and it was easier because the tone of his voice helped to
    communicate. 
    
    Then he came over for a week's visit. What a surprise! Even though I
    had his photograph and had heard his voice, he was very different from
    what I had imagined. Communication now was no problem because I could
    hear the tones of his voice and read his body-language. 
    
    He left the company a year ago, sadly, but we still write and
    occasionally increase phone company profits!

    	You know, Mark, I thought the little 2' rats were bad,
    	but this variety is bigger, badder, tougher, - and _mean_,
    	-and they have more intelligence, too.  I think they have 
    	special little "swarmings" in which they temporarily suspend
    	the petty infighting of tribal ratlords, and enjoin forces to
    	attack the unwary fundamentalist that dast to venture in.  
    	Sort of like a scene from Willard.  The Christian enters in, 
    	and unbenownst to him, they have their teeth sharpened and ready.
    	The next thing you know, they're  jumping to the attack from 
    	out of every nook and cranny, flying off the walls, and marching
    	forth out of every dark corner in Soapbox Village.   Pretty soon, 
    	all you can see is a massive sea of rats, - and a head poking out 
    	of the top with eyes bugged out that just seem to say, "Please, 
    	please!  Somebody help me!  Please..."  Stay too long, and they'll 
    	want to tie you up and carry you back to their main lodge for a 
    	rathole party and pick their teeth.  Logical response, "Well.. sorry, 
    	guys, ummm, I have to go!", ( exit stage left, run like the Dickens ).

    
    	Stevey,
    			No, I certainly would be the last one to laugh
    	at the actuality and reality of an individual actually going to
    	the land of the lost.  It is indeed an incredibly horrible thing.
    	Nonetheless, there should be some comic relief.  Think about it.
    	The Bible says, "The joy of the Lord is my strength."  Well...
    	take that word _strength_, and get the Hebrew word and it is
    	"maza".  It means "stronghold"! Do you see the point?  A strong-
    	hold of laughter and joy is something that the devil would just
    	love to steal from us, -if we would let him.  They want to enter
    	into our stronghold and use it *against* us.  "Ho! Ho! Ho! You
    	stupid Christians are so miserable!", they want to say.  "I'd
    	rather laugh with the sinners than to cry with the saints", they
    	say.  We are the ones who should be joyful, - not them!  Did
    	you know that joy is a Christian obligation.  They should NOT
    	be joyful because their _consciences_ are defiled.  The weight
    	of accumulated sin should be getting to them... But, if they
    	can push it off with comic relief, then they are using a spiritual
    	principle in _reverse_.  We have to turn it around without getting
    	personally abusive towards individuals.
    
    								/Greg

    Re: .124
    
    Greg,
    
    You brought a smile to my face.  But let's not forget that this
    conference is as visible to participants of SOAPBOX as SOAPBOX is for
    us.  We need to be careful about not being overly critical in here.
    Indeed, many/most of the participants here would have no desire to
    enter into much of the bantering that goes on in the 'box.  But let's
    leave not get involved in slamming others in here.  (And I am pointing
    fingers at myself as I say this....)
    
    Mark L.

    
    	BTW, Steve,
    			The BIble says in Proverbs that wisdom will mock
    	and laugh at the calamity of the wicked because they hearkened
    	not to the voice of wisdom.  Wisdom wanted to pour out her spirit
    	unto the wicked and they would not hear it.  Now, when we talk
    	about the "wicked", it is a general term.  I do not disclude the
    	possibility that there may be people from the 'Box who will repent
    	and turn their life around, but what shall we say?  Shall we say
    	that the 'Box is actually the congregation of the righteous?  
    	That would be foolish.  I think we can pretty well see that the
    	general jist of the 'box is towards humorous laughter and the
    	mutual justification of wickedness.  Lets admit it, its a party
    	over there!  Should we sit around with severe, somber, sober,
    	austere faces trying to look like statues, and sit around and   
    	weep over them, knowing that they are doing it to themselves, 
    	or can we joke about it?  Is it possible that if we can joke 
    	about it and show that Christians _do_ have fun, they can joke, 
    	they can laugh, they can take the upperhand of joy, and even
    	put forth the right hand of fellowship, ( as opposed to the
    	left foot which they gave me! ), then _maybe_ that might turn
    	some of them around?  Either way, joy is a stronghold we hide
    	in because this really is a war, and one of the safest places
    	to be during a war is in the stronghold.
    	
    								/Greg 

    Being a former participant in SOAPbox I can say that for me, while
    folks disagreed, I don't feel particularly beat up in there..
    challanged? yes!  Jumped on a few times?  Yes!  But overall the folks
    in there have treated me respectfully.  Is that unusual for soapbox?  I
    dunno, but that was my experience.
    
    My first note wasn't exactly a *winner* kinda note in there, it was on
    Aids and alternate lifestyles.  However, I spoke matters of the heart
    and matters on my heart in that note, even though I stated my faith and
    beliefs about said subject.
    
    People in the world today are hurt, many have suffered emotional
    abandonment, and physical abuse.  People are angry inside and many
    don't even know why.  To stand up and SHOUT out the Gospel only further
    alienates such people.  
    
    God's love is healing, not condemnation.  God's love is pure, not
    tainted with conditions.  God's love is the love we all look for from
    one another, only to find disappointment as our human natures dictate
    imperfect love.  
    
    The nation, the world needs LOVE, but UNCONDITIONAL love from God.
    
    Nancy

    
    ..the joy of the Lord is my strength...
          ^^^
    
     This Joy is only given to the Christian from God, the non-christian
    cannot experience this because they no not the source.
    
    Dan
        

    
    				One other point about this, and that
    	is the world loves winners, and _hates_ losers.  The deception
    	of the enemy is to try to portray the Christians as "the losers".
    	We are the winners.  They are not.  We are the ones of whom it
    	is written, "he has given us every spiritual blessing in heavenly
    	places in Christ Jesus", and "he has given us everything we need
    	for life and for godliness", and "we are more than conquerors
    	through Him that loved us".  As the winners, we ought to act the
    	part of the winners, - because we are exactly that.  To say other-
    	wise, would be to contradict God's Word.  We don't want to do that.
    	If we are not acting the part of the winners, then how does that
    	help to tear down their strongholds?   If we look and act like
    	the losers, then why would they want to come out of their world?
    	They say, "We have abandoned the truth, and am now looking for
    	a good fantasy."  But, truth dispels fantasy.
    
    			We have to be honest.  Why should we lie and act
    	as though there is no hell?!  Should we try to play cover up to the 
    	truth?! Why should we try to play their deceptive game, and act as
    	though there is no such thing?   Do you think that they do not have 
    	a good reason to worry about it?  If they do, then shouldn't they
    	at least have the opportunity to know it?  How will they know it
    	if nobody tells them?   I mean, there is only two places
    	to go... heaven and hell.  That is it!  Its a bimodal distribution.
    	That is what my Bible tells me.  The Bible does not try to play 
    	cover up.  The Bible _wants_ people to know the truth about it.  
    	Shall we act as though it is not a real place, or like we have to 
    	apologize for our God and His Word?  Should we reinforce the deception
     	that the world lives in by shying away from the subject when so 
    	many people are taking up residence down there?!
    
    				Honesty is the best policy.  If they
    	know the truth, then, what will set them free?   Will a sweety
    	pie attitude set them free?  NO!  If I want a sweety pie attitude
    	I can get that more easily from the "Da Free John" cult, - and I
    	_certainly_ do NOT want that!!   The _TRUTH_ shall set them
    	free.  That was what Jesus said.  Shall we call Jesus a liar,
    	and say, "yeah, but we do not have to tell them the whole truth."
    	Well, I've heard that a half-truth is a whole lie, and if you
    	get a half-truth, watch out, because you may be getting the
    	wrong half.   Paul Tsongas said, "PLEASE, tell me the truth!
    	THat is what I want!  No matter what the cost!!  No matter how much
    	it may hurt, PLEASE - tell me the TRUTH!!!"   Why?  Because if you
    	know what the problem is, its size, its magnitude, its operation,
    	its mechanics, etc. - you have more chance of being able to
    	successfully overcome it, then if you settle for lies and vain 
    	wishes.   The world is living off of imaginations and wishful 
    	thinking.  Only the truth can set them free.  We can give them 
    	the truth.  We have the seed, we need to sow it.  God's principles
    	do work, and if we sow His seed, then He is responsible for making
    	His Word work to bear fruit, and He will.  Lets not get deceived,
    	and go off on a deception which says: "I can love them into the 
    	kingdom without the Word."  That does NOT work because that is NOT 
    	God's principle.  You have to work the soil, you have to sow the Word,
     	you have to water the Word, you have to harvest the field.  Its
    	all there in the Word.  If we use His principles, it will work. 
    	
    								/Greg

    Greg,
    
    Of course believers can joke and laugh.  I just don't find anything
    funny or laughable about anyone going to hell.
    
    "having the last laugh", FWIW, isn't commonly understood in a comical
    sense.  It's vengeful - spiteful.  You may not have intended it that
    way, but to my eyes, it's hard to see anything remotely funny about
    putting a tract in the face of someone about to be cast out of G-d's
    presence forever saying "i told you so - ha ha ha".
    
    As for winners and losers...believers are winners by what?  By G-d's
    grace and that alone.  None of us did anything special to warrant
    eternity.  In that mind, we should humbly and compassionately reach out
    to those who don't know yet.
    
    It's not funny business, IMO.
    
    Steve

.116 and subsequent notes  (Greg)

The Judge will not be laughing at those who depart from him to destruction.

Jesus took no delight in knowing that others would "get it in the end"
because they did not accept Him:

Matthew 23
 37  O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them
which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children
together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would
not!
 38  Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
 39  For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say,
Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

This is a heart felt plea for those who did not listen, not condemnation
nor glee for those who would not listen for they would get what they deserve.


Mark

    
    	That's right, Steve.
    
    				It is the Word of God that grows mightily
    	and prevails.  But, we should make sure that we are affirming to
    	the end His Word without being _ashamed_ of His Word, or trying
    	to make apology for what _He_ said.
    								/Greg

    Greg,
    
    Re: .134
    
    I haven't got much more to say.  Again, I don't think we're
    communicating.
    
    
    Let's get back to the topic at hand.
    
    
    Steve

    
    	Hi Mark,
    
    			I gotta stick to the Word because I know it is 
    	not a lie, ( and that is a rhema word for someone out thar ).
    
    			I agree that He will not be laughing when the
    	wicked get destroyed, and neither will we.  That is why God
    	will have to wipe every tear from our eye, because our grief
    	over the lost will be that immense.  God has no pleasure in
    	the destruction of the wicked and neither do I.
    
    			But, hey... look at how the world laughs at
    	the Christians.  Is it unreasonable to simply try to turn that
    	laughter around and reverse it?  I don't think so.  If they
    	are laughing, then we should be able to do so, too.  Because
    	there is the possibility that that might wake them up, and 
    	that is part of the _intention_!  I mean, look, if you see
    	a child go sulking around like a crybaby, do you join in the
    	pity party?  No, you have to put a little shame on that, so
    	that they wake up.  One gentle way is with a little humor.
    	I think it is a good idea, anyways.
    
    								/Greg

Matthew 18:23  Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened unto a certain king,
which would take account of his servants.
 24  And when he had begun to reckon, one was brought unto him, which owed
him ten thousand talents.
 25  But forasmuch as he had not to pay, his lord commanded him to be sold,
and his wife, and children, and all that he had, and payment to be made.
 26  The servant therefore fell down, and worshipped him, saying, Lord, have
patience with me, and I will pay thee all.
 27  Then the lord of that servant was moved with compassion, and loosed him,
and forgave him the debt.
 28  But the same servant went out, and found one of his fellowservants,
which owed him an hundred pence: and he laid hands on him, and took him by the
throat, saying, Pay me that thou owest.
 29  And his fellowservant fell down at his feet, and besought him, saying,
Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all.
 30  And he would not: but went and cast him into prison, till he should pay
the debt.
 31  So when his fellowservants saw what was done, they were very sorry, and
came and told unto their lord all that was done.
 32  Then his lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou
wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me:
 33  Shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant, even
as I had pity on thee?
 34  And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he
should pay all that was due unto him.
 35  So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your
hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses.

.137 Me
and .136 Greg

Stick to the Word, then, Greg; all of it.

You and I are the servant with the great debt forgiven.
Walk humbly.

   
    
    Greg,
        
    I will write you offline about this when I have the
    time and energy.  
    
    
    Nancy
    

re .116

38643::GRIFFIS

   	I'll get the last laugh, though.  As they line up on judgement
    	day, I'll greet them and hand them tracts which say, "This is what
    	you should have known, and this is where you went wrong..."


If this is truly your attitude, you'll never make the first cut. Nowhere in
the Bible can you point to this reasoning being proper for a follower of Christ.
Matt 7:3-5 is the clear answer to this statment.

Dave

    38643::GRIFFIS
    
    
    >>I'll get the last laugh, though.  As they line up on judgement
    >>day, I'll greet them and hand them tracts which say, "This is what
    >>you should have known, and this is where you went wrong..."
    
     This is exactly the way your notes were recieved. As condecending. as
    that is not the most positive form of communication, you should expect
    a non-positive response. Bluntly, you come across as having a superiority
    complex (or an even worse complex). You judge people, which is not your
    place. No wonder you do it so poorly.
    
    Remember you attract more flies with honey than vinigar.
    
    							Derek

 Folks, I'm write locking this note at least until sometime Thursday until
 your moderator staff can take some time to convene. 

 There's been considerable heat generated and feelings aired, which may or
 not be healthy..I don't know as I don't dabble in psychology.  I do know
 that throughout this topic attitudes began to show, which greatly bothered
 this moderator (and noter) and frankly I think it might be a good idea to
 just let us all take a breath and remember who we are and what we are, and
 to give some thought to the fact that perhaps a lost soul or 2 are reading
 in here, and witnessing what has been taking place the last couple days, they
 may logout never to return.  *That* really bothers this moderator (and noter).
 One contributor to the topic, Mr Metcalfe, graciously hid his replies, and I
 had the hope that perhaps others would as well..

 So, pending a discussion with the moderators, this note is write locked for
 a bit.



 In Him


 Jim co-mod